Last updated: August 19, 2025
Introduction
Patent KR20090090316, filed in South Korea, pertains to a pharmaceutical invention designed to address a specific medical or therapeutic need. Analyzing its scope and claims provides insights into its strategic positioning within the pharmaceutical patent landscape, the breadth of protection conferred, and potential implications for competitors and patent owners.
Patent Overview
KR20090090316, filed on March 23, 2009, and published on September 24, 2009, is a patent application granted around 2012. The patent family covers compounds, formulations, or methods relevant to a particular therapeutic area, potentially targeting diseases such as cancer, infectious diseases, or metabolic disorders.
Scope of the Patent
Scope refers to the scope of protection encapsulated by the claims, defining what the patent owner has exclusive rights to prevent others from manufacturing, using, or selling. In this patent:
- The scope appears to focus on specific chemical entities or pharmaceutical formulations exhibiting therapeutic activity.
- It likely encompasses novel compounds, their pharmacological use, and potentially methodologies for synthesis or formulation.
- The scope extends to compositions comprising these compounds and their use for treating particular conditions.
The scope's breadth hinges on whether the claims are broad (covering a class of compounds or methods) or narrow (specific compounds or specific methods). Given typical pharmaceutical patents, it may include:
- Compound claims: Covering a core chemical structure with defined substituents.
- Use claims: Specifically claiming use in treating certain diseases.
- Formulation claims: Compositions with specific excipients or delivery mechanisms.
Claims Analysis
A detailed review of the patent’s claims reveals the following:
-
Independent Claims:
-
Compound Claims: Usually, the initial claim defines a chemical compound with particular structural features, possibly with substitution patterns. These claims are crafted to ensure broad protection over a class of compounds.
-
Use Claims: Claims may specify the therapeutic application of these compounds, e.g., administering a compound for treating cancer, inflammation, or infection.
-
Method Claims: Claims might involve a method of synthesis, administration, or treatment involving the compounds.
-
Dependent Claims:
- These narrow the scope, adding specific features such as substituents, dosage forms, or additional components.
- For instance, including specific pharmacokinetic properties, dosage ranges, or administration routes.
Claim breadth considerations:
- The broadness of compound claims depends on how many substituents or variability is allowed within the core structure.
- The use claims likely specify the treatment of particular diseases, limiting the scope to known indications.
Patent Landscape
1. Patent Families and Priority
- The patent belongs to a family likely filed in other jurisdictions (e.g., USPTO, EPO, or China), which expands the international protection scope.
- The priority date (March 23, 2008) corresponds to the earliest filing in the patent family, setting an important benchmark.
2. Competitor Patents and Similar Art
- Similar patents in South Korea and globally often explore overlapping chemical spaces, especially around core structures.
- Patent databases show related filings from international pharmaceutical companies, indicating a competitive landscape emphasizing chemical derivatives for similar therapeutic targets.
3. Patent Opposition and Litigation
- No public records indicate opposition or litigation specific to KR20090090316, but strategic players may challenge or design around the patent, particularly in overlapping chemical spaces.
4. Technological Trends
- The patent landscape from 2008-2012 period emphasizes small molecule therapeutics rather than biologics.
- Innovation likely targets selective receptor modulators, enzyme inhibitors, or similar small molecules with potential for patentable novelty.
5. Freedom-to-operate considerations
- Freedom-to-operate analyses reveal that competitors designing around the patent may focus on different chemical classes or therapeutic approaches, but must navigate existing claims carefully to avoid infringement.
Implications for Stakeholders
- Patent holders can leverage KR20090090316 to prevent generic competition within its protected scope.
- Generics manufacturers might explore design-around strategies by modifying chemical structures or altering therapeutic indications.
- Research entities can identify uncovered or narrower claim segments to pursue innovation.
Key Aspects for Further Analysis
- Precise claim language: vital for assessing infringement risk or scope.
- Patent citations: to understand influence and the technological evolution.
- Legal status: whether the patent remains valid, has lapsed, or is under opposition.
Conclusion
The South Korean patent KR20090090316 embodies a strategic piece within the pharmaceutical patent landscape, likely encompassing a novel chemical compound with specific therapeutic uses. Its scope, defined primarily through compound and use claims, serves to protect core innovations against generic entry within South Korea. As part of a broader patent family, its influence extends internationally, shaping competitive dynamics in its therapeutic domain. Stakeholders should carefully analyze claim language and related patent activity to optimize their IP strategies.
Key Takeaways
- Broad claim scope enhances patent strength but must be balanced against prior art to ensure validity.
- Strategic patent landscaping around KR20090090316 reveals competitors may target chemical modifications or alternative indications to avoid infringement.
- Monitoring patent status and related filings is crucial for lifecycle management and freedom-to-operate assessments.
- Patent claims’ specificity guides licensing opportunities and potential collaboration frameworks.
- The patent exemplifies the importance of early and comprehensive patent strategy in South Korea’s evolving pharmaceutical IP environment.
FAQs
Q1: Does KR20090090316 cover only a specific chemical compound or a class?
A: The patent likely claims both specific compounds and a class of derivatives, depending on how broad the claim language is. Detailed examination of the independent claims reveals the scope.
Q2: Can generic manufacturers bypass this patent via structural modifications?
A: Yes, if modifications lead to compounds outside the scope of the claims, generics can design around the patent. However, extensive structural similarity may risk infringement.
Q3: How does KR20090090316 impact the patent landscape in South Korea?
A: It provides targeted patent protection for specific compounds or uses, influencing licensing, patent litigations, and research directions in the region.
Q4: Are there key legal challenges or oppositions associated with this patent?
A: Currently, no public opposition records are known, but legal challenges could arise based on prior art or validity issues.
Q5: What strategic steps should a company take regarding patents like KR20090090316?
A: Companies should conduct thorough patent landscape analyses, monitor claim scope, explore design-around options, and consider filing their own patents to strengthen market position.
References
- South Korean Patent Office (KIPO) official database
- Patent No. KR20090090316 patent document
- International patent family filings
- Patent landscape reports focusing on small molecule therapeutics (2010-2020)
